i don't think there is any question about the answer; the Technology Industry.

no, not the banks and not the gov't. its clearly the technology giants. as evidence i point to the following 2 daily charts of the Nasdaq and financials over the last 4 years since turmoil struck. the Nasdaq is the leading stock sector performer. here are the sickly financials:

and here is the strength of the tech giants as evidenced by the Nasdaq:

the price chart says it all.

i also think that what Google did along with other tech companies in derailing SOPA was a significant demonstration of their power over the politicians and the media industries, both considered by many as power brokers.

why do i bring this up? because i think it may be possible to exploit what should be a natural wedge btwn these industries.

the more pessimistic way to view these arguments would be to say that technologies ascendancy has been allowed or driven by inflation facilitated by the banks/gov't and w/o it they wouldn't be thriving as much as they are. that certainly would be a valid argument but i prefer to look at it from a more optimistic standpoint.

the human condition is to innovate, thrive, develop and i argue that what is happening in our society with technology would happen with or w/o the banks and inflationary tendencies. the banks and Wall Street are just riding along on the backs tech stocks and the real economy and would w/o them just shrivel away and die the death they deserve.

why am i bringing this up in regards to Bitcoin? b/c i see alot of confusion around on the Forums about what the best direction is for us to take our economy in wake of whats happened with Tradehill and Paxum. while many good ideas have been introduced i would like to advance another strategy which would be just as valid and i think easier.

if one of the tech giants could be convinced to invest in Bitcoin this would ensure its success. the best way IMO would be for a company like Google to buy a stake in MtGox. this would solidify mtgox's future, create a windfall for Mag Tux, and Bitcoin would be off to the races. obviously another alternative would be for a tech giant to start their own exchange but that wouldn't be the most direct route to what we would like to accomplish. if Mag Tux could be convinced to offer up a large stake to a tech giant we should encourage this.

why would any of these companies want to do this? b/c there is also no doubt that the financial system based on debt is in trouble. we are in the process of forming another bubble which is even more dangerous than what we built up to 2007-8. as evidence to this i point to Europe. yes we could debate forever whether or not the US, who owns the reserve currency, will somehow be immune to all this but lets assume for the moment we're not and that our national debt will eventually drag us down as well. the last thing these tech giants want to have happen is to be dragged down by the financial industry once again into the abyss.

back to why they should invest in Bitcoin. i think there is a general feeling in this country and worldwide that wealth preservation right now is paramount. forget about 8% stock market returns in perpetuity that was the prevailing wisdom when i grew up. if those of us who have anything can hold onto it, that would be a victory. yes, they could invest in gold but seriously, how can a global economy as fluid as what we have now be based on an inanimate object (gold bugs stay away)?

the argument to take to a Google or whoever in the industry is that NOW is the time time to invest in a currency that will hold its value. yes we still have whipsaws in the price but we are still young and this should be expected. the key point is the fixed supply, known distribution rate, and longevity (yes i think over 3 yrs is longevity). this is why gold and silver have done so well to this point. while the Nasdaq stocks are flying and near a peak is the optimum time to start looking for alternatives; before the next Crash which we know is coming somewhere along the line here.

the reason i emphasize Google is b/c they of all tech giants have a vested interest in a free and open Internet b/c of Search. users need to know what they search is free and unfiltered. this meshes so well with a free and open currency that is based on the Internet. Mike Hearns is one of us as well.

we are now over 3 yrs into this project and IMO we are here to stay. hanging out in the Mining forum over the last couple of months has me even more convinced of the strength of this movement. anyone can buy a computer and support the network. there is big money being thrown at gpu and fpga power (by little guys) right now and this is where the "backing" of Bitcoin comes from. fpga is developing at a fast pace and it will get even easier for the average person to buy megahashes.

its been said that Satoshi might have been a consortium of individuals from the tech industry who planted this seed in the wild to let grow and eventually adopt. whether this is true or not, who knows. its besides the point. i think any of us who has any connection to Silicon Valley or any of these companies need to be pounding the turf and pushing the concepts and fundamentals of Bitcoin to the thought leaders there. they of all people will understand what Bitcoin is all about; especially if it came from them. they should realize that they are the ones who are really in charge of this country and economy and should want to take pre-emptive steps to insure the value of their money while they still have it.

i don't think there is any question about the answer; the Technology Industry.

lolz epic fail. Which tech company can issue a trillion dollars to itself with a keystroke?

"Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes it's laws"

Quote

i think any of us who has any connection to Silicon Valley or any of these companies need to be pounding the turf and pushing the concepts and fundamentals of Bitcoin to the thought leaders there. they of all people will understand what Bitcoin is all about; especially if it came from them. they should realize that they are the ones who are really in charge of this country and economy and should want to take pre-emptive steps to insure the value of their money while they still have it.

Don't confuse power and influence with "being in charge." Big tech companies have power and influence, sure. But to say that "they are in charge" is a wild stretch. And even to say that anyone is "in charge" is a bit misguided. We live in a complex economy, with many interests pulling in many directions - governments, banks, financial companies, tech companies, influence groups, on and on. And even within these subsets, they don't always agree. Banks fight with each other, tech companies fight with each other. There is no monolithic power structure - though there are many powers to be fearful of.

On your other point, about a tech company buying a stake in Gox, I'm sure they will do such a thing when they wish to. There is no need for Tux to pursue these people, and doing so only makes Bitcoin look desperate for attention. Further, it is highly unlike a company like Google would mess around with the grey area legality of the Bitcoin world, at least not openly. It's too much trouble and risk for a large company.

It is small companies, and prescient VC groups, who will run this space for a while.

Bankers are experts at diverting money into their own pockets while screwing everybody else: their shareholders, their customers, their competitors, and their governments. Many technology companies actually make good products for their customers and money for their shareholders and that is why their stock prices rise.

Those who cause problems for others also cause problems for themselves.

i hear the pessimism loud and clear. i just think we can change things. y'all wouldn't be here if you didn't think so too.

When we have technology in every home that can stop bullets and other weapons the state is more than willing to use to impose it's will on the people I'll believe you. Until then, you, my friend, are living in a fantasy world.

cypherdoc, I agree with your sentiment. It’s a shame we have seen none of them embrace or encourage Bitcoin. Especially considering that they are young companies and were at a similar stage to where Bitcoin is now.

However, I do not understand how you think they would want to preserve purchasing power with Bitcoin when we have seen that its value can reduce by 94% over the course of six months.

What I see as the major problem for Bitcoin now is that the price is declining, and if you have watched the negative news lately, they FOLLOWED the price decline. Also, shorting creates the incentive to bring Bitcoin down. All of this has a negative impact on Bitcoin’s progress in my view. And if a technology like Bitcoin is not making progress, it is regressing.

cypherdoc - I also agree with your overall sentiment, for two reasons:

1) Innovation is what underlies humanity's advancement. Sure, it gets bled by governments and so forth, but tech companies are still core drivers of increased living standards over time and do naturally accumulate a lot of investment and value.

2) There are a lot of people in the tech sphere whose world-views should align very nicely with Bitcoin. Peter Thiel and PayPal's early history are prime examples. The technology wasn't up to the task at the time, but bitcoin is different, and I'm sure a host of very wealthy influential tech-elite are watching closely.

Bitcoin is the first monetary system to credibly offer perfect information to all economic participants.

cypherdoc, I agree with your sentiment. It’s a shame we have seen none of them embrace or encourage Bitcoin. Especially considering that they are young companies and were at a similar stage to where Bitcoin is now.

However, I do not understand how you think they would want to preserve purchasing power with Bitcoin when we have seen that its value can reduce by 94% over the course of six months.

What I see as the major problem for Bitcoin now is that the price is declining, and if you have watched the negative news lately, they FOLLOWED the price decline. Also, shorting creates the incentive to bring Bitcoin down. All of this has a negative impact on Bitcoin’s progress in my view. And if a technology like Bitcoin is not making progress, it is regressing.

Blitz, first of all don't make the mistake of just looking at short term price fluctuations as the measure of whether Bitcoin is failing or not. Just look at all that's been accomplished in the last year alone. And if you do measure price, then just how much are we up over the last year?

We are making extraordinary progress with mining in my opinion which is only going to strengthen the network in the long run. In my particular case I just don't care if i'm losing small amounts of money mining. Its the principle of supporting something I believe in that drives my motivation and clearly I think it will pay off financially in the long run. And I am not alone when it comes to this attitude.

Look what the internet has done to the financial industry the last ten years. Its brought it to its knees with more to come. It takes time and patience.

I kind of felt this was TLDR. I agree that the tech giants hold enormous political power - that's because of their large market capitalization. I also agree that they outperformed financials - that's because the crisis at its very core had to do with how much risks and bad assets banks had, and investors are afraid to dump their money into banks, so it has to go somewhere else... the smarter (bigger) ones bought profitable techs instead of investing in garbage like gold or bonds.

I think it's foolish to think that a tech giant would invest in bitcoin. A more logical alternative is that one of them would create a superior cryptocurrency product with more features that solves many of bitcoin's incredible weaknesses, chiefly the impossibly large blockchain size if everyone started using it and its very slow confirmation speed (<20 minutes is totally unacceptable for modern commerce) for transactions. No company would invest in a product that didn't return a net profit, though, so it's unlikely we'll see this happen at all in the context of a totally free "people's cryptocurrency" system.

I’ve been around for a year now like you, and while I agree that much has gotten better (client, exchanges, etc.), I am simply disappointed by how little has been accomplished that has actual utility for normal people.

For example, in February 2011, Silk Road opened up. I was thrilled, it was an awesome application for Bitcoin, and I knew it would flourish. Now if I saw more of that, for example Bitcoin gambling or an MMORPG utilizing it, or hell, anything that is going to actually have users, really, then yes, I would agree.

But until then, we are stuck with this market of positive and negative feedback loops, and we have Bitcoinica to amplify them. I can sense the sentiment change in here, it’s never a good thing.

I would say that Tech won the recent SOPA skirmish largely because the Western peeps still have to much power. I'll expect a re-doubling of efforts to reduce that power through a combination of economic disenfranchisement, distractions (probably war with Iran which serves several purposes), and intimidation.

But anyway, corporate titans at battle make for a good show. Tech happened to be on the right side of this one, but that was strictly accidental. They'll almost certainly be on the wrong side of various future police state efforts is my guess.

Don't confuse power and influence with "being in charge." Big tech companies have power and influence, sure. But to say that "they are in charge" is a wild stretch. And even to say that anyone is "in charge" is a bit misguided. We live in a complex economy, with many interests pulling in many directions - governments, banks, financial companies, tech companies, influence groups, on and on. And even within these subsets, they don't always agree. Banks fight with each other, tech companies fight with each other. There is no monolithic power structure - though there are many powers to be fearful of.

On your other point, about a tech company buying a stake in Gox, I'm sure they will do such a thing when they wish to. There is no need for Tux to pursue these people, and doing so only makes Bitcoin look desperate for attention. Further, it is highly unlike a company like Google would mess around with the grey area legality of the Bitcoin world, at least not openly. It's too much trouble and risk for a large company.

It is small companies, and prescient VC groups, who will run this space for a while.

Interestingly we have monopoly laws against industry but none against the those who monopolize the flow of wealth???

It was a cunning plan to have the funny man be the money fan of the punning clan.1J13NBTKiV8xrAo2dwaD4LhWs3zPobhh5S